2010-05-14_REVISION - C1996083 (2)

Home Browse Search

43. On revised page 2.05-100, please describe the reclamation of the Freeman Gulch vent shaft and how that reclamation protects the hydrologic balance. 44. On revised page 2.05-110, there is a discussion of mine water inflow and discharge from the Bowie No. 2 Mine. If data are available, please update the discussion to include anticipated mine inflow and discharge due to proposed mining in the transferred Bowie No. 1 Mine area. 45. On revised page 2.05-116, there are five monitored springs listed that have decreed water rights. However, the two tables on revised page 2.04-29 show that there are several additional springs and ponds that also have decreed water rights and that will be monitored. Please update the hydrologic monitoring plan in Section 2.05.6(3)(b)(iv) to include all of the decreed water rights. 46. In the last two paragraphs on revised page 2.05-118 and in the first two paragraphs on revised page 2.05-119, the monitoring schedules state that a full suite sample will be taken quarterly and a full suite sample from list 1 will be taken semi-annually. Please clarify. 47. Please explain why BRL is proposing to terminate hydrologic monitoring of well TC-03-01(R), as shown on revised pages 2.05-117 and 2.05-124. 48. Please explain why the text concerning hydrologic monitoring for culverts C-1 through C-4 is being deleted on revised pages 2.05-119 and 2.05-124. These four culvert locations still appear on Map 9. 49. As shown on the list of water monitoring stations starting on revised page 2.05-120, BRL is proposing to terminate hydrologic monitoring at certain ponds and springs which have decreed water rights or are of high value and that are managed by the USDA-Forest Service. Do any of the federal coal leases require BRL to perform hydrologic monitoring of any of these sites, regardless of whether or not the sites are undermined? 50. There are several designations for ponds and springs shown on Map 9 which are not on the list of water monitoring sites starting on revised page 2.05-120. The sites located west of Steven's Gulch are ponds 11-8, 12-5 and 12-7, spring 1-8 and pond/spring 28, 29 and 1-10. In addition, there are springs 5-2 and 6-7 along the West Fork of Terror Creek. Should these sites be removed from Map 9 or were they inadvertently left off of the list of monitoring sites? 51. A major concern in reviewing the proposed western mine plan area with regard to potential groundwater impacts is that none of the monitoring wells associated with the Bowie No. 1 mine plan area have been incorporated into the Hydrologic Monitoring Plan for the new expanded Bowie No. 2 permit area as described on page 2.05-117. The proposed plan includes monitoring wells located at the Terror Creek mains and one proposed well down gradient from a portion of the proposed new disturbance. There are essentially no wells included in the hydrologic monitoring plan that would be either directly up gradient or down gradient from the new disturbance associated with the western mine plan proposal. There appears to be numerous inactive wells from the Bowie No. 1 permit area that would be suitable monitoring wells for the new western mine plan area. In addition, several surface water and groundwater monitoring sites are listed in Tables 1, 3 and 4B in Volume 4 of the Bowie No. I Mine permit application along with the footnote that monitoring would be reactivated if mining occurred in the east part of the Bowie No. 1 Mine. Please address this and modify the Hydrologic Monitoring Plan accordingly. 7